The Syntax of Love

by Alexander Afanasyev

Genres: Psychology, Nonfiction

349 pages, Unknown Binding

Reviews

[rae · Rating 5 out of 5]

psychosophy is an excellent system. shame about the misogyny

[Grace · Rating 4 out of 5]

4.03 stars. ELVF here. This is a pretty solid system, but it is not without its flaws.

PT: Personality systems, books recommended by a friend

WIL
1) Functionality. I LOVE that this system, not unlike enneagram, focuses more on attitudes and motivations than the more unconscious processes of, say, mbti. This makes it a more practical system for everyday use. AWESOME.

2) Afanasyev has this characteristic cynicism that just CRACKED me up. I know this isn't a comedy book but MAN it totally could be for those who appreciate dry humor. (I spy with my little eye a 3E.) I legitimately had to pause in my reading for a bit because I was laughing SO hard at some of Afanasyev's zingers. He's particularly sarcastic in his descriptions of 4Fs (my people), which was as scathing as it was delightful. This is not for the easily offended. 😂

3) PAGE 24 PAGE 24! A direct quote:

FIRST SECOND THIRD FOURTH
"hammer" "river" "ulcer" "trifle"
process result process result
excess norm deficiency scarcity
monologue dialogue dialogue monologue
hardness flexibility flexibility hardness
cruelty pity envy indifference
caution fearlessness fearlessness fearlessness
confidence confidence doubt unreliability
independence compromise compromise dependence

THIS is the ESSENCE of the ENTIRE system, and this is what I will continually return to when I seek out the heart and soul of psychosophy (and its offshoot, attitudinal psyche). This bit right here was so immensely helpful as a compass while I navigated some of the later contradictions.

4) NEUROLOGY BABEY! There were a few comments in here suggesting the role of psychoneuroendocrinology in personality. HECK YEA!! LOVE THAT.

WIDL

1) the "mental energy" component. Afanasyev mentions, albeit fairly briefly, that the function order dictates the user's direction of mental energy with the first two functions using the majority of one's energy. Asanasyev THEN proceeds to outline people who appear to lean heavily upon their 3rd function "ulcer," which is a direct contradiction of this previous idea of mental energy distribution. (Rob Collopy's Attitudinal Psyche addresses this.)

2) Data sets and armchair theorizing. This system is all well and good (PAGE 24!!!) but it is so so theoretical. Where is the practical application! The surveys sent out to people with questionnaires to better understand typology and how each type tends to self-identify! Where is the research expanding and expounding upon this alleged universal truth of humanity as proposed by Afanasyev! I so wish there was more info here about how people responded to this concept.

3) Section lengths? Some type descriptions were around 3 pages, some were ten. I found the sections that were expanded upon were the sections that needed the least clarifying. ALL the descriptions, imho, should've been capped at five pages. Maybe that's the hyperactivity in me speaking (*cough cough* 3V *cough cough*)

4) Cramming Goethe into a box. (It's not just Goethe, but I liked that title.) A lot of these type descriptions seemed like a justification of a pre-existing notion rather than genuine speculation and analysis of character. Contradictions upon contradictions were explained away with strange little side comments. True, the human is a variable being and is not readily explained by any particular system so such comments further elucidating character are not to be done away with fully in a functional system, but the proportion of contradiction to base theory seems to effectively dispute the theory of psychosophy as a whole.

NEUTRAL GROUND
1) ELVF description. AHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA yikes. But I mean, at least it's not as bad as VELF Anna Akhmatova. That was BRUTAL.

[osikbarbosik · Rating 5 out of 5]

The system Afanasyev coined in this book is an absolute one. It offers insane depth and consistency - both theoretical & practical- and gives food for thought, i.e. concepts that can be analyzed, and improved even further. I've been studying Psychosophy for 2 years now, and so far my understanding of the system can be briefed down to this;

4 Positions;
1st Spot- 50% of Energy. Resultative + Strong (immovable, self-oriented, overflowing, thick-skinned, domineering, crude, confidence)
2nd Spot- 30% of Energy. Processional + Strong (fluid, both self and others oriented, morbid, regular-skinned, flexible, tuned, confidence)
3rd Spot- 15% of Energy. Hyper Processional + Weak (fluid, both self and others oriented, lacking -mostly exaggerated within ones psyche, unconfident, sensitive, dominance desiring, extra tuned & gentle, insecurity)
4th Spot- 5% of Energy. Resultative + Weak (immovable, others oriented, neglected, thick-skinned, flexible, crude, uncaringness)


4 Aspects;
Physics (F):
Basically the realm of the physical world. Money, sex, sports, food, clothes, personal space, physical activity, body, appearance, personal requests (again, in the realm of the material), and everything of that nature. A purely physical concept. Non-Rhetoric.

Will/Volition (V):
Confidence, birthright, the extent to which a person is willing to go to achieve their goals, and dreams. It is the confidence in own existence, and abilities, the will to go further and beyond, amount of responsibility, control, and ownership. Purely a metaphysical, existential/spiritual concept. Non-Rhetoric.

Emotion (E):
Own bubble, own little reality. The importance of emotions, sentiments, and color in ones world, reality. It is the expressiveness, creativity, passion, depth, turmoil, aesthetics, atmosphere, personal experience and palette. Purely a metaphysical, existential/spiritual concept. Rhetoric.

Logic (L)
Opinions, the importance of the views, the breadth of subjects an individual has an opinion on, depth, the ability to defend own view, the willingness to discuss and change own opinion & the opinions of others, the ability to connect different concepts, apply them onto different ones, as well as apply them to reality, the ability to think of new things, build onto the existing concepts, the interest in all things intellectual. A metaphysical concept. Rhetoric.


Whereas his system itself is insanely good, accurate, and consistent, I wish Afanasyev dug deeper into topics such as Clubs (ex. FE Club - FELV, FEVL, EFLV, EFVL), Sextas (Pente Sexta/5th Sexta - Resultative F & V, Processional E & L, so types such as FELV, FLEV, VELF and VLEF), Accentuations (1V-3; Aggressive 1V, 1V-2; Strong 1V, 1V-4; Resultative 1V), maybe even the possible interactions between Psychosophy and Socionics (since Afanasyev did know about Socionics back when he wrote the book), and many many more such officially unexplored branch outs. Although, this does give us more opportunities to explore everything ourselves, with which I am both grateful and frustrated; grateful because it satisfies my curiosity & relieves me from boredom, and frustrated because it is always nice to see the opinion of the predecessor & very sad keeping all these opinions & revelations (seemingly at least) to oneself since it is hard finding people that are as passionate about things like this. Hopefully a big, informed community will come together, so I can share my own personal theories on the system, and we can all share and delve into these question and topics deeper collectively.


As for his writing ability, I would prefer to leave no comment. Haha

[Nicolás Cornejo · Rating 5 out of 5]

La psicosofía es un gran sistema. La jerarquía de funciones parece casi perfecta y es respetada en los psicotipos (normalmente). Es un sistema simple y fácil de entender: cuatro funciones (Emoción, Lógica, Físico y Voluntad) ordenadas por prioridades. A pesar de la simpleza, es un sistema preciso y el toque final llega con la sintaxis del amor.
Afanasiev es un gran escritor, tiene un humor muy bueno y gran conocimiento de la cultura. Invade de ejemplos a algunos psicotipos (VELF, EFVL), pero en otros no menciona ninguno (ELVF, LEVF). Si bien esta desproporción se ve algo negativa, no afecta la riqueza de las descripciones.
¿Cómo se puede estudiar al amor? La sintaxis del amor responde esta pregunta y lo hace de manera espectacular: Eros, Philia y Ágape son recetas perfectas para las relaciones. En “Una letra”, Afanasiev aclara que las relaciones de, por ejemplo, Eros total, no están destinadas al fracaso. “El libro trata no solo el futuro, sino también el presente, y su propósito no solo es predecir, también lo es corregir.” Las relaciones siempre pueden mejorar y el amor siempre puede florecer.
Me gustaría mucho que la psicosofía se haga más conocida porque Afanasiev le tiene mucho aprecio a la cultura rusa. ¿Cómo sería la psicosofía aplicada en Latinoamérica? Quien sabe, sabe…

[charlotte · Rating 3 out of 5]

This is a …strange book to say the least. However Afanasyev is still a talented writer, and the ridiculousness and colorful dramatization of his descriptions make for an entertaining read. The descriptions of each type feel as if they were written about someone that he knew very well- and it feels humorous and sentimental.

When actually applying his typology system you can’t take all of the details at face value because he is so heavily biased for or against certain placements. Another disclaimer I’d add is I do not believe his typings of historical figures is entirely accurate. I’d recommend looking into these people’s lives yourself and applying his structure to them instead of taking him at his word.

[Zélia Rousseau · Rating 4 out of 5]

Idk if I read a bad version but there wasn’t any chapter on the emotion placements, which is unfortunate because I would’ve liked to read about those. I was looking forward to it. Otherwise it was very good

[Micha K · Rating 3 out of 5]

maybe a bit biased, read when age 12 (ikik was into typo back then, was 1st book i read ant typo, then i read gifts differing)
(copy-pasting my review from when i read it)


3.5/5. Skipped last part (the one abt love) also WHERE ARE THE EMOTION PLACEMENTS AUGHHH

[autumn ˶ˆ꒳ˆ˵ · Rating 5 out of 5]

really easy to understand introduction to psychosophy. i love the way afanysev describes things tbh

[benji]

were you born as an alpha chicken (1V) or an ant (2V) or a mosquito (also 1V)

when you hate jung's and augusta's ideas then this might be one outcome

[avy · Rating 5 out of 5]

Not sure about my type but I absolutely love this book. Afanasyev's writing is beautiful and the book is enjoyable to read. He uses many detailed and interesting examples when writing, and the way he describes each type is almost romantic, putting a lot empathy and humor in it.

[chloe · Rating 4 out of 5]

Afanasyev has a dark humour that appeals to me, his archetypes are wicked in descriptions — leaving me baffled on more than one occasion on how he thought to use the language he did but it worked a charm on me. I only wish he didn’t seem to grapple with ropes in the dark to cover up inconsistencies in aspects correlating with the living symbols associated.

On a side note, to this day I have not gotten any closer to ascertaining my own psychotype. I believe it impossible to accurately assign a type to yourself as they are too specific to observe in others and thus a non-empirical theory. Stick to Jung, maybe even Naranjo or Ichazo.